Obstacles Seen To Reform Of Judicial Campaigns

May 19, 1987|By Joseph R. Tybor, Legal affairs writer.

The major challenge facing an Illinois State Bar Association committee proposal for a ban on political contributions from attorneys to judges is finding alternative ways to finance judicial campaigns, according to officials of other bar groups, lawyers and judges.

Most interviewed Monday described the proposal outlined last week in a committee report to the ISBA as a laudable goal that would be difficult if not impossible to implement under the present system of electing judges.

``How are you supposed to run as a candidate in a partisan system without contributions?`` said Cook County Circuit Court Judge David Shields, who has headed a committee of judges seeking retention in elections. ``If you`re going to run a successful campaign in a partisan system, you have to have some funding, and I don`t think it`s reasonable to expect judicial candidates to spend that out of their own pocket.``

Brian Crowe, a former Cook County judge who recently resigned to join a private practice, agreed that alternatives to financing are limited under the current elective system partly because attorneys make up the bulk of contributors, particularly for sitting judges who are required by the Illinois Consititution to run for retention every six years.

``A judge really has a constitutional obligation to bring his record to the public every six years and, unfortunately under our present system, that costs money,`` Crowe said. ``How are you going to raise that money?``

Others fear that imposing such a radical limit on judicial campaign financing might weaken efforts being made toward creating an appointive system of selecting judges, which many, including the special committee itself, consider the key to meaningful reform.

``There is no doubt that contributions by lawyers to judicial candidates can result in entanglements we`ve seen in the Operation Greylord scandal, but it is not enough to prohibit contributions by lawyers,`` said Frederick J. Sperling, president of the Chicago Council of Lawyers. ``It is equally troublesome to have companies and individuals contributing to judges who may some day decide their cases.

``For that reason, we believe the only complete solution to the problem is merit selection.``

The proposal to call on the Illinois Supreme Court to use its rulemaking powers to bar political contributions by attorneys to judges was among 38 recommendations by the Special Committee on Professionalism that was submitted to the ISBA Board of Governors.

There are few who would argue such a rule would remove the appearance of impropriety inherent in such contributions, but Sperling wasn`t the only bar leader to speculate that it could lead to greater problems.

Joseph Stone, president of the Chicago Bar Association, said prohibiting contributions by lawyers would place political parties ``in a very paramount position as being the only source of revenue and that, of course, isn`t a good thing, either.

``For a judge to stay wholly independent and go to the public at large for financing is just an inordinate task and it could be an impossible task,`` said Stone.

The ISBA committee called for the ``immediate implementation`` of the proposal. However, committee chairman Peter H. Lousberg, a Rock Island lawyer, said the panel`s primary concern was to give suggestions as to what might be done to improve the perception of integrity within the current system and lacked the time and resources to go further.

``Obviously, the political contribution from lawyer to judge is fraught with danger . . . and some new system has to be devised,`` Lousberg said. ``We did not turn our attention into what that system should be but I think the ingenuity of judges, lawyers and politicians combined can come up with some kind of program.``

Richard L. Thies, president of the ISBA, enthusiastically endorsed the committee`s recommendations. He said one alternative could be to ban political contributions to judges, whether from attorneys or other individuals, and adopting a state checkoff system, similar to federal election laws, which allow taxpayers to designate $1 of their income tax payments to fund presidential elections.

The proposal, along with the full report, is due to go before various other committees of the ISBA for discussion and possible modification before it is adopted as official policy, perhaps as early as the group`s annual meeting next month.